Redefining a Bestseller
Posted by annastan on October 30th, 2009. Filed under: Books, In the News.Yesterday I caught part of an NPR interview with John Irving. He talked about his latest book (his 12th!) and a bit about writing in general. At the end of the interview, when asked why he thought literary fiction wasn’t as popular as it used to be, Irving said something that really struck me. He pointed out that his first bestseller, The World According to Garp, only sold under 50,000 copies in hardcover. By today’s standards, that would be nowhere near the bestseller list.
This made me wonder if what we call a bestseller could have really changed so much over time. Current bestsellers se
ll a mind-boggling number of copies so that they almost seem to flood the market. Books like Twilight and The Lost Symbol eclipse pretty much all other books when they’re at their most popular. Of course this can be seen as a positive since it gets more people reading, but it seems to me that many of the super bestseller readers aren’t readers in general; they come into the store, buy the book they’re looking for, and leave – no browsing involved. The Twilight model is a kind of “reading for the masses” that almost reminds me of the Walmart model: get more bang for your buck!
John Irving said that in his estimation, there are more readers of fiction now than there have been in the past. This might be contrary to the doom and gloom reports we hear about publishing all the time, but I think he might be right. More people do seem to be reading, but they seem to be reading fewer books. That’s why those super bestsellers have such shockingly high sales numbers; people are going with what they’re told is the next big thing instead of browsing through and finding titles on their own.
This does make me wonder what Irving’s career would have looked like if he’d been writing his most popular books, such as Garp and A Prayer for Owen Meany, today. Would anyone even notice them? Or would they be eclipsed by the super bestsellers that are more of a “sure thing”?
October 30th, 2009 at 7:52 am
Oooh, great question, Anna. It’s very thought provoking. Things are so different now that they were 20 years ago and even were different 20 years before that. I guess that’s where we authors need to be super flexible.
October 30th, 2009 at 9:16 am
Very interesting. Makes you wonder who will be the lasting literary greats from the 21st century – all we seem to be hearing about are the best-selling greats.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Yes, flexibility really seems to be the key. Since things change so much, sometimes even in just a year or so, who knows what the writing landscape will be like ten years from now? Luckily it seems like there are still people out there who enjoy good books, even if they’re not huge sellers.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Good point! Since literary fiction flies so low on the radar, I wonder how much of it will be remembered. As for what will endure, I can’t even begin to image what the “classics” will be!
November 1st, 2009 at 10:14 am
Great post–and great question. In a way I find it sad. I think we’re not a nation of readers in the sense of being widely read so much as being a people who have to have the latest must-have book. I can’t imagine anyone going out of their way today to read A Prayer for Owen Meany, for instance. (Unless Oprah tells them to.) And it’s a great book. A lot of bestsellers, aren’t. (I was tempted to say most aren’t.) But I tend toward literary fiction, so am I biased?
November 1st, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Interesting post. Thanks for sharing.
November 1st, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Yet the really good books seem to find their way through word of mouth. Blogs play a big part in passing the information. While I used to find great books through my friends recommendations, I’ve found many good books from recommendations of my newer blog friends.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I would agree that a lot of bestsellers aren’t what we might call “good literature” but, then again, I guess they’re not really meant to be. Luckily, there are some books out there that do become big sellers that I would say are pretty literary (GRACELING, for example) so maybe things aren’t as bad as they seem?
November 1st, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Good point, Deb. There’s definitely a difference between the big sellers that are forced down our throats via advertising and those that succeed because of word-of-mouth. Blogs have referred me to some wonderful books that I might not have heard about otherwise. I wonder if the books that become popular through recommendations are more lasting than those huge sellers – I’d like to think so!